Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877763
Debarshi Ray <debars...@redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |debars...@redhat.com
--- Comment #2 from Debarshi Ray <debars...@redhat.com> ---
Since Igor beat me to it, consider this an unofficial review.
* rpmlint complains about no-manual-page-for-binary, install-file-in-docs,
invalid-desktopfile, incorrect-fsf-address and macro-in-comment.
- install-file-in-docs and invalid-desktopfile (Thanks Mathieu) have been
fixed upstream
* Package is named according to Package Naming Guidelines.
* Spec file matches with base package %{name}.
* Package meets Packaging Guidelines.
* Package meets Licensing Guidelines.
* The License field in the spec file matches the actual license.
* License text included in %doc.
* Spec file is written in American English.
* Spec file is legible.
* Sources used to build the package matches upstream source.
* Package can be successfully built on atleast one primary architecture.
* ExcludeArch is not needed.
X It should have a BR on gdk-pixbuf2-devel, not gdk-pixbuf2.
* Locales are handled properly using %find_lang.
* Package does not contain shared library files.
X Pedantically speaking it should have Provides: bundled(libgd). See
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries
- It must be noted that libgd is not meant to be installed as a system wide
shared library. It is just a way for GNOME applications to share widgets and
other common code on an ad-hoc basis.
* Package is not designed to be relocatable.
* Package owns all directories created by it.
* Files are not listed more than once in %files.
* File permissions are set properly.
* Macros are used consistently.
* Package contains code.
* No need for -doc subpackage.
X Files marked as %doc do not affect the runtime behaviour.
- You could consider marking %{_docdir}/%{name} as %doc
* No need for -static subpackage.
* No need for -devel subpackage.
* Package does not contain libtool archives.
* Package has a %{name}.desktop file.
- Problems in %{name}.desktop file have been fixed upstream. (Thanks Mathieu)
* Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
* Filenames are valid UTF-8.
* Package builds in Koji:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4716019
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
